neilj
Member
Posts: 6,376
|
Post by neilj on Nov 27, 2022 14:14:21 GMT
Social house building could pay for itself as will private house building, it's the planning consent and the determination to do it that has been missing Oh, easy peasy then. At the moment huge sums of tax payers money is being used to subsidise the private rental sector. Investing in social housing means money can be saved on that and the tax payers has a capital asset that can pay for itself over time Unfortunately the tories seem to have an ideological problem to building social housing and even Labour was reluctant to give it the push it needed But none of that will happen unless and until we get the planning sorted. Post war huge numbers of social and private housing projects were built. New towns were created, it needs a similar drive again if we are to meet our housing needs |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2022 14:16:34 GMT
alec , crossbat11 and others So if Labour's public stance on Brexit and immigration are spin concealing other intentions should we also assume Labour's briefings on constitutional reform and devolution are also spin without intent? If you like - you can assume anything that you want really, I doubt if anyone’s much bothered either way. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2022 14:18:03 GMT
This is both popular and necessary, contrasts well with the tories looking to put the brakes on planning for new homes to appease some if their nimby back benchers Bit rude, nodding off when you’re being interviewed. |
|
|
|
Post by alec on Nov 27, 2022 14:20:11 GMT
hireton - "So if Labour's public stance on Brexit and immigration are spin concealing other intentions should we also assume Labour's briefings on constitutional reform and devolution are also spin without intent?" I think that would be cause for concern, if that is indeed what they are doing. However, without checking back, I think you posted a tweet along the lines of 'we won't be ripping up the TCA and renegotiating it'. Signing up to all to all kind of closer trading arrangements is perfectly compatible with not ripping up the TCA. That's the point I was trying to make, (probably not clearly enough). My suspicion is that Labour's plan will be to gradually erase as much of the damage from the TCA by closer and closer alignment, through a kind of reverse salami slicing. The boiling frog backwards. Who will really care that we sign up to a load of EU regulations and allow the ECJ to be the ultimate interpreter of what they mean, if it protects our chemical industry, or if it ensures we get new medicines and medical devices registered for use in this country? With a new government it will be very easy to introduce some truth into the narrative, with honest briefings that detail things like the costs to UK industry of UK REACH or detail how many new health developments UK patients have been missing out on because companies can't be bothered to go through the UK regulatory system because we're too small a market for such an expensive process. So getting public support for this stuff will be very straightforward, especially as polls are showing that the argument for Brexit has been lost already. I just think that they don't want to open up any avenues for Conservatives to attack them, but the simple point - that I have been making since way back when - that the TCA is a starting point, not the end. Labour can do an awful lot to reintegrate into EU markets without ripping up the TCA.
|
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Nov 27, 2022 14:21:38 GMT
Social house building could pay for itself as will private house building, it's the planning consent and the determination to do it that has been missing Oh, easy peasy then. IMO it will be fairly 'easy peasy' for LAB, certainly a lot easier than it has been for CON (+CON/LDEM coalition) CON (and LDEM) have a lot of NIMBY MPs as a lot of their seats are in 'leafy' areas that DON'T want new houses. We just saw Rishi U-turn on planning reform due to a rebellion from 46+* NIMBY CON MPs. Most of LAB's seats are 'urban' and FWIU then Sir Keir is going to have a more 'devolved' approach giving more powers to the regions (eg 'proper' SW England where LAB might gain a lot of seats in GE'24 might not have to adopt huge centrally set targets). Hence, IMO, he will be able to make the required legislative changes to get 'the right houses built in the right places'. LAB HMG will need to ensure the 'bottom-up' (ie regions->overall) approach does ensure sufficient houses get built but he 'incentivise' that via other aspects of 'Levelling-up' (no need to mention he's copying that idea from CON)
Easy peasy, NIMBYism squeezy  PS There is an Issue Specific thread for Housing covering a lot of the policy areas that LAB can copy adopt from Liam Halligan (as there are no copyrights on good ideas). * www.building.co.uk/news/gove-pulls-key-planning-reform-vote-as-rebellion-grows/5120610.article |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Nov 27, 2022 14:33:10 GMT
(2) Singapore "go it alone" deregulation. I feel Option 2 was floated by the ill fated Kwarteng and Truss, and promptly sunk as it lacked any credibility unless you'd had a heavy dose of hubris. The 'Singapore-on-Thames' meme was always IMO over-exaggerated by likes of SMogg. May introduced her 'three buckets' approach to 'unshackling' UK from anti-growth EC regulation (Retain, Reform, Remove) with very few 'laws' ending up on the bonfire of 'Remove' I've mentioned Solvency II reform as one example but the below piece covers broader aspects ( "Banking Package, Solvency II, and the Green Bonds"*) of the Financial Market where UK can now 'unshackle' itself from EC rules as even May-Hammond worked out that we had to get a Clean Brexit on services. TBC but as well as the articles colin posted WRT how UK can help 'lead' Europe from within then IMO we can also 'lead' EC from without. With 28 27 countries stalling anything and everything in EU that doesn't require a 'crisis' response then UK can be more nimble and ensure we protect and grow our global developed comparative advantage as a Financial Centre - something that was held back when we part of the EU. EC might get a case of FOMO and then copy UK, or not. It will suit UK better if they do not copy us and stick with their historic anti-growth approach to services. www.ebf.eu/ebf-media-centre/joint-letter-eu-securitisation-framework-1122/ |
|
|
|
Post by johntel on Nov 27, 2022 14:55:24 GMT
At the moment huge sums of tax payers money is being used to subsidise the private rental sector. Investing in social housing means money can be saved on that and the tax payers has a capital asset that can pay for itself over time Unfortunately the tories seem to have an ideological problem to building social housing and even Labour was reluctant to give it the push it needed But none of that will happen unless and until we get the planning sorted. Post war huge numbers of social and private housing projects were built. New towns were created, it needs a similar drive again if we are to meet our housing needs I agree with your analysis Neil, but it needs huge up-front investment and I don't see Lisa Nandy being capable of forcing through the housing revolution. Having said that maybe Sir Keir is the man to do it, if he gets a big enough majority. He's exceeded every expectation so far. If he can come up with and implement proper plans for housing and social care he will be my hero. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,633
|
Post by steve on Nov 27, 2022 15:24:57 GMT
jibWithout acceptance of the the four pillars single market or Swiss style deals aren't just unlikely they're impossible. All we will be left with is a slightly less crap extended free trade agreement with all the unnecessary hurdles of non tariff barriers in place,in order to improve professional services and arts and movement for business purposes at the very least you have to have something very much akin to visa free freedom of movement but possibly time limited but certainly beyond the 90/180 day rule. The European union has no deal similar to this with any country in the world outside of the eea neither does the U.K. It's not a "mini deal" it's a fundamental rethink that they show no inclination to make. A Norway type single market arrangement has always been on the table from the European union and it still is. None of these are as good as membership but such a deal comes far closer than the damage caused by the Brexit deal we have currently and will add tens of billions to our gdp. I genuinely fail to understand why brexitanians object to having our free movement which they stole restored when it's blindingly obvious that it's British citizens that have suffered from the loss of access to 26 other countries far more than they have lost with restricted access to just 1. It's not rocket science I can think of nothing other than crass obstinacy or xenophobia being behind the insistence. I can't think of any other occasion where losing individual rights and entitlements have been couched as an achievement. It's akin to cutting your own leg off and applauding your improved ability to hop!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2022 15:32:45 GMT
It's amazing how the right-wing press all fall into line and start fawning over Labour/LibDems as soon as they feel the tide is turning (and providing they are not too leftie). |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2022 15:42:51 GMT
I can't see Iran losing to USA- it will all hands to the pump Interesting, but you'll forgive me, after your previous "expectations", if I don't have much confidence. I'm going for my full house instead! we shall see |
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,376
|
Post by neilj on Nov 27, 2022 15:44:44 GMT
Another upset, Morocco beating Belgium, currently ranked second in the World, 2 goals to nil.
Morocco deserved to win as well
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2022 15:46:49 GMT
And now, for a topic seldom, if ever, discussed on UKPR2  Who's that on the right? 🤔 |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,572
|
Post by pjw1961 on Nov 27, 2022 15:56:17 GMT
Who's that on the right? 🤔 An obscure former trade secretary I think. Can't recall her name. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,633
|
Post by steve on Nov 27, 2022 16:07:50 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2022 16:18:27 GMT
Anyone else a fan of Sabine Hossenfelder? I've only just discovered her. A super-intelligent German lady with a droll sense of humour who can explain the most complex subjects in a way that makes you think you understand. For anyone bored of the footy and interested in science on this wet Sunday I strongly recommend her blog backreaction.blogspot.com/ I'd love to hear her thoughts on polling methodology. And Brexit  . Never heard of her before but have now watched a couple of her videos on YouTube and they're fascinating. Also, her accent and deadpan delivery reminds me of the Finnish PM in Veep* which amuses me - www.youtube.com/watch?v=HAItaBPQHAs
*Played by the wonderful Sally Phillips, who incidentally has a child with Down's Syndrome and campaigns on their behalf (I know people were talking about this on here recently).
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on Nov 27, 2022 16:50:35 GMT
Nevertheless the decision to leave the EU was made democratically in 2016, reiterated in 2017 when both main parties supported it and again in 2019 when the Tories promised to "Get Brexit Done". Yawn...what we have in the Uk for choosing a government is often called democracy, but it really isnt. Its a system designed to give the impression the public are consulted while retaining power in the hands of a small elite. a few thousand people chose the current MPs. In most cases the public election was a foregone conclusion, but for the others the final outcome was still no more than a choice between two chosen by the ruling elite.. And you will be aware that no more than 1/3 of the population voted to leave the EU, moreover had a proper referendum been called which would have satisfied legal standards of fair representation of all citizens of the Uk, then the likely outcome would have been remain. It was a fix. A decision was made and we did leave, but so what? We can rejoin just as easily. (ie, on the basis cost is no object) You must also realise that option 1 was well and truly scuppered by leave MPs. If their views that this is an unacceptable outcome are taken into account, then option 3 membership actually becomes the inevitable outcome. And pretty much, that is why we joined in the first place. Because actually its the least objectionable outcome for everyone. The real trick leave pulled was in convincing people various things would happen post brexit which never could. They are simply impossible, and thats why we will end up with rejoin. The principle leavers ought to be made personally liable for the cost to the nation of their deceit. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,633
|
Post by steve on Nov 27, 2022 17:17:26 GMT
Here's an interesting idea.
Currently bus drivers in Japan are on strike.
However because they don't wish to inconvenience the public they are still running a full service.
They're just not collecting the fares!
|
|
|
|
Post by davwel on Nov 27, 2022 17:26:45 GMT
We all know there is a reason why the SNP do that. The SNP ideal is a Conservative UK government primarily elected in England and SNP dominance in Scotland - the perfect contrast and the perfect breeding ground for grievances, with independence proposed as the solution. Hence why the SNP were so keen to support Boris Johnson in getting a GE in 2019 (along with the dim-witted fantasist Jo Swinson who seemed to think she was going to be Prime Minister) - a hard brexit for the whole UK was a small price to pay for advancing the cause of Scottish independence. Since it appears the Conservatives are likely to lose the next GE it is time from an SNP perspective to ramp up plan B, which is to maintain that not just Labour but the Liberal Democrats as well are identical to the Conservatives. This is necessary to keep support for independence up. Bit cynical perhaps but makes strategic sense, so good politics. Of course it doesn't help that Starmer is determined to give them plenty of ammunition. Bottom line is we need proportional representation so a greater variety of parties can get elected. You're undoubtedly right but I don't know who they're trying to convince on here. I may be mistaken but it seems to me that all Scottish contributors are already independence supporters. It sometimes grates a bit that for a UK wide discussion site that some here will shoehorn anything and everything into the topic of Scottish independence even for someone like me who is sympathetic to their aims and to Scotland more generally. |
|
|
|
Post by EmCat on Nov 27, 2022 17:28:23 GMT
Here's an interesting idea. Currently bus drivers in Japan are on strike. However because they don't wish to inconvenience the public they are still running a full service. They're just not collecting the fares! I vaguely recall something similar happening in Australia some years back - rail station staff went on strike by not collecting any money for tickets |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on Nov 27, 2022 17:30:06 GMT
I agree with your analysis Neil, but it needs huge up-front investment and I don't see Lisa Nandy being capable of forcing through the housing revolution. All it really needs is to grant enough planning permissions so that building plots become cheap and readily available. The building industry has changed and become one of huge companies with very few one off projects. Thats because its impossible to get individual planning consents on any scale. Usually it currenty requires knocking down one dwelling to build another, and I hope people can see how stupid that is when there is a shortage. There is lots of scope for small scale construction to deliver a lot of homes, if it was legal to do so. |
|
|
|
Post by davwel on Nov 27, 2022 17:31:00 GMT
I didn`t get in (above) my comment to domjg that I am keeping an open mind on voting for independence.
If Starmer wins the next GE, then I would vote to keep the UK united in a ref.
But I want an Indy Ref as soon as possible, since so much has changed since the last one
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,633
|
Post by steve on Nov 27, 2022 17:38:48 GMT
Twinned with the Brexit benefits society.  |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,633
|
Post by steve on Nov 27, 2022 17:48:43 GMT
It would appear those thinking Starmer's embracing of Brexit is just a cunning stunt may be wrong.
"Keir Starmer has ruled (today) out bringing back free movement of people between Britain and the EU, saying it would be a “red line” for Labour if it gets into power – despite supporting the policy just three years ago.
The Labour leader said free movement “won’t come back” if he becomes prime minister as Brexit has already happened and “ripping up” the deal would lead to years more wrangling with Brussels.
However, his decision to rule out a return to open borders with other European states if Labour gets into government will disappoint some in his own party who believe EU immigration should be welcomed as a cultural and economic benefit.
Starmer also ruled out a “Swiss-style” deal with the EU, which would allow access to the single market but require more generous immigration rules, after reports the government was considering such an arrangement prompted frantic denials from No 10.
He told the Mail on Sunday: “A Swiss deal simply wouldn’t work for Britain. We’ll have a stronger trading relationship and we’ll reduce red tape for British business – but freedom of movement is a red line for me. It was part of the deal of being in the EU but since we left I’ve been clear it won’t come back under my government.”
Just another brexitanian fantasist only with a red cherry on the top!
Ignore 80% of your own voters that's the way to go.
Prat.
|
|
oldnat
Member
Extremist - Undermining the UK state and its institutions
Posts: 6,131
|
Post by oldnat on Nov 27, 2022 18:09:15 GMT
steve
Shh. You'll offend domjg by "undermining Labour at every opportunity." Supporters of other parties aren't supposed to do that (in his world).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2022 18:26:41 GMT
It would appear those thinking Starmer's embracing of Brexit is just a cunning stunt may be wrong. "Keir Starmer has ruled (today) out bringing back free movement of people between Britain and the EU, saying it would be a “red line” for Labour if it gets into power – despite supporting the policy just three years ago. The Labour leader said free movement “won’t come back” if he becomes prime minister as Brexit has already happened and “ripping up” the deal would lead to years more wrangling with Brussels. However, his decision to rule out a return to open borders with other European states if Labour gets into government will disappoint some in his own party who believe EU immigration should be welcomed as a cultural and economic benefit. Starmer also ruled out a “Swiss-style” deal with the EU, which would allow access to the single market but require more generous immigration rules, after reports the government was considering such an arrangement prompted frantic denials from No 10. He told the Mail on Sunday: “A Swiss deal simply wouldn’t work for Britain. We’ll have a stronger trading relationship and we’ll reduce red tape for British business – but freedom of movement is a red line for me. It was part of the deal of being in the EU but since we left I’ve been clear it won’t come back under my government.” Just another brexitanian fantasist only with a red cherry on the top! Ignore 80% of your own voters that's the way to go. Prat.
Hmm... world so f***ed up that Starmer doesn't fancy having a crack at governing and instead wants the Tories/other parties to stay in power forever and own it?
Or b) he was speaking to the Mail in the vain hope that only their readers would pick it up.
Either way, I'm a bit confused by it all to be honest.
|
|
|
|
Post by alec on Nov 27, 2022 18:33:10 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Nov 27, 2022 18:42:26 GMT
The way things are going, I really, really can't see myself voting Labour at the next GE.
I live in a safe seat so don't need to worry about letting the tories in, but, even so.
Many of the floated Lab ideas/noises, from ruling out free movement, ID regarding elections and the 'naming and shaming' of those that buy a bit of weed run counter to what I would like to see.
Ok, maybe I'm not the typical UK voter (if there is such a thing), but, I can't be the only one that is seriously being put off by the noises I'm hearing.
|
|
|
|
Post by shevii on Nov 27, 2022 18:47:09 GMT
Hmm... world so f***ed up that Starmer doesn't fancy having a crack at governing and instead wants the Tories/other parties to stay in power forever and own it?
Or b) he was speaking to the Mail in the vain hope that only their readers would pick it up.
Either way, I'm a bit confused by it all to be honest.
It's very possible we're simply repeating the period before the 1997 election where everyone was saying Blair was taking the stances he did in order to get in and then things would be different and actually what you saw with Blair pre 1997 is exactly what you got post 1997. Having said this, with Starmer who knows? He told so many lies to get elected as Labour leader (topically to "defend free movement as we leave the EU") he could be telling a whole load more lies now. |
|
|
|
Post by jimjam on Nov 27, 2022 18:51:26 GMT
A rare foray to explain.
Free Movement in the EU context is a specific part of Single Market membership so if one is not rejoining the single market one is not going to have free movement.
'Easy' movement for musicians, other artists and young people would be the aim in the first 2 years or so of a Labour Government.
Possibly other groups as well but you get the idea?
No wish to argue just saying what the position is.
|
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Nov 27, 2022 19:06:21 GMT
The way things are going, I really, really can't see myself voting Labour at the next GE. I live in a safe seat so don't need to worry about letting the tories in, but, even so. Many of the floated Lab ideas/noises, from ruling out free movement, ID regarding elections and the 'naming and shaming' of those that buy a bit of weed run counter to what I would like to see. Ok, maybe I'm not the typical UK voter (if there is such a thing), but, I can't be the only one that is seriously being put off by the noises I'm hearing. It will be worth keeping an eye on the WNV and DK %s in LAB'19 x-breaks for upcoming polls. Those are currently quite high with CON'19 which is part of the reason for the large LAB lead. Sir Keir didn't really say anything new in the Sunday Wail piece but it does appear his comments have received a bit more attention (on UKPR2a at least) However, not every vote is truly equal. Some seats (such as your own by the sounds of it) are very safe LAB seats so Sir Keir can take some liberties with voters in very safe LAB seats. The other thing to watch is whether or not LDEM adopt a policy different to their GE'97 approach of fawning over NewLAB and hoping to win more MPs in GE'24 purely from ABCON tactical voting with the vain hope LAB only put up 'paper candidates' in seats where LAB could win or at least leap-frog LDEM into being the 'best placed' ABCON party for future LEs and GEs. With Sir Ed in charge then I doubt he will spot the opportunity of being the 'Rejoin' party or just taking up the Sir Keir pledge to bring back purple passports (FOM). I don't have a crystal ball, so TBC. |
|
.
